Making a camera - God's way

[GeoffBoulton]

God designed humans and since he’s ‘perfect’ we need only to follow his designs when creating things of our own. Hmmm, we’ll see ;)


Okay, let’s design a camera using God’s design for the human eye.

So what are the basic components of the eye?

A lens – to focus the light
A retina containing rods and cones – to collect the light and change the light into electrical signals that our brains can process
Some nerves – to carry the electrical signals from the eye to the brain

Seems simple enough

A lens – no problem there
A retina with rods and cones – no problem there either we can use a CCD
Some nerves – nope, no problem here we simply use wires to carry the signals from the CCD to the processor (brain)

Great, let’s put them together according to God’s design

The lens goes in the front
The CCD goes behind the lens
The wires come out of the front of the CCD, yes out of the front towards the lens, so they cast a shadow over the CCD and obstruct the image we’re trying to form
We have thousands and thousands of wires, one from each cell of the CCD and every single one goes in front of the CCD not behind it where they would have no effect on the image
The wires now have to go back through the CCD to get to the processor so we need to make a hole in the CCD for them to pass through making part of the CCD useless

Yes, this really is the ‘perfect’ design that God created.

Strangely enough though many ‘lower’ creatures like squids and octopuses have the correct design with the ‘wires’ coming out of the back of the retina instead of the front.

Question: Why would God choose to give his ‘greatest creation’ an eye that is an inferior design to that of a squid?

Can anyone help me with this question?

[sudikics]

My google, brilliant, Geoff. Kudos.

Wait, I just realized that this hasn't been touched for over a year. Oops, sorry.

[huntedbyninjas]

Question: Why would God choose to give his ‘greatest creation’ an eye that is an inferior design to that of a squid?

Can anyone help me with this question?

Good question. God made us inferior to many animals. And on top of that, we are very helpless when we are born, whereas other animals can start crawling and walking not to long after birth. 'Tis a depressing thing to think about..but i guess the versatility of the human mind kind of balances that out. We figure out how to become like an eagle or cheetah.

It would be nice to be born somewhat helpful though, wouldnt it?

[H4ckJack]

If I'm not wrong we're "God's greatest creation" not because we hold the best genetic code in the Universe(s) but because we HAVE A BETTER BRAIN.

I really wanna see a squid that makes a "Surface suit" in order to survive out of water. I really wanna see a cheetah drive a car that goes faster than it can run.
EDIT: Oh sorry my bad.... didn't read the above post. He basically said what I said.

[sudikics]

First: Please, It is said a lot, but someone please find the place where it says where man is god's greatest creation? Because I can't find anything...

Second: It DOES say, however, that we were created in god's image. Does that mean that god has our type of inferior eye? If so, then maybe that's why man isn't perfect. Also, does that mean a squid has a greater eye than god?

[GeoffBoulton]

If I'm not wrong we're "God's greatest creation" not because we hold the best genetic code in the Universe(s) but because we HAVE A BETTER BRAIN.

I really wanna see a squid that makes a "Surface suit" in order to survive out of water. I really wanna see a cheetah drive a car that goes faster than it can run.
EDIT: Oh sorry my bad.... didn't read the above post. He basically said what I said.

Firstly, the point has nothing to do with whether squids are better than humans it is to do with why God would make ANY animal have ANY component part that is better designed than the human equivalent if we are supposed to be his ultimate creation.

In fact, the point was not that the quid has a better eye but that the human eye is so poorly designed it could only have been designed by an idiot. A God who knows everything but who makes an eye with flaws so gross even an average 15 year-old with no special training in optics could see the flaws in the design.

Secondly, since you want to use the brain as the ONLY marker for superiority over other creatures, there are many animals whose brains perform much better than ours. You are basing your argument only on "My brain is the best because my brain says it is". "This is how I perceive things and I can't understand how other creatures perceive things so I must be better than them".

We have not even begun to understand how many animal's brains manage to perform tasks or reason solutions that we would find impossible. Indeed there is growing evidence that many animals surpass us in specific areas of intelligence.

[H4ckJack]

My point was that humans are better than other creatures (proven by the fact that humans dominate the planet) so we DON'T NEED better component parts to thrive as race. On the contrary: if we would have a better brain, better lungs, better ANYTHING we'd transform energy faster (consuming Earth faster). One might think that was planned by a superior being - actually a superior non-existent being, another might see it as a random event.

[H4ckJack]

By better brains I didn't mean more performant brains, but better thought quality than a monkey who also has opposable thumbs.

[sudikics]

Or, that we have evolved just very recently (a mere million years ago) and we are still in the process of evolving and becoming better.

Sorry, no. Well, technically, yes, but our culture has brought evolution to a halt.

Think of it this way:

A child is born with 360 degree vision (that would be awesome...) However, his appearance would have him rejected from society. Because we sustain our own needs, evolution is goin gto have a hard time from now on with homo sapiens.

[GeoffBoulton]

My point was that humans are better than other creatures (proven by the fact that humans dominate the planet) so we DON'T NEED better component parts to thrive as race. On the contrary: if we would have a better brain, better lungs, better ANYTHING we'd transform energy faster (consuming Earth faster). One might think that was planned by a superior being - actually a superior non-existent being, another might see it as a random event.

It depends on your definition of dominate.

If you regard it as the most numerous then this honour probably goes to the phytoplankton in the oceans.

Greatest impact on the planet? The phytoplankton wins again. Without them there would be insufficient oxygen generation for other life forms to exist.

Once again you are stating 'facts' based only on your limited and incomplete worldview.

[GeoffBoulton]

By better brains I didn't mean more performant brains, but better thought quality than a monkey who also has opposable thumbs.

Better thought quality? You haven't got a clue what a monkey's or dolphin's thought processes are so how do you know? Monkeys can demonstrably outperform humans on tasks such as remembering sequences so why should their other cognitive abilities be any the less remarkable?

The problem is that we only carry out experiments based upon our perceptions which immediately biases results against other forms of life which may have abilities and thought processes well beyond our own.

Monkeys outperform man (http://monkeydaynews.blogspot.com/2007/12/chimps-outperform-humans-at-memory-task.html)

[sudikics]

True, it is slow, but if we manage to continue our existence long enough, mutations wil start to happen. Althoughm now that I think about it, one aspecty of evolution will be welcome: virus protection. If someone gets a gene, stopping AIDS, that's gonna be a popular gene...

P.S. It's snowing outside!! Yay!!!

[Sister Faith]

True, it is slow, but if we manage to continue our existence long enough, mutations wil start to happen. Althoughm now that I think about it, one aspecty of evolution will be welcome: virus protection. If someone gets a gene, stopping AIDS, that's gonna be a popular gene...

P.S. It's snowing outside!! Yay!!!

The medical community thinks this is what it's seeing now:
http://www.spiritofmaat.com/archive/oct1/nairobi.htm

[huntedbyninjas]

"But the women who became infected with HIV had one thing in common besides the lack of exposure, and that was fear. Even though they had, with total impunity, been exposed to HIV daily for the past eight to thirteen years, they were still afraid. As the Spirit of Ma'at showed in our August issue, it is the combination of emotion, thought, and action that enables us to shapeshift our environment. In this case the emotion was fear, the thought was that they would contract AIDS, and the action was to take protection. If mind can change our DNA in a forward-looking direction, it can also change it back"

So these woman could subconsciensly change there DNA to be suseptible to HIV and AIDS? Hahha..Okay..Whateve.>.>

[As Hawa Chelangat says, ''I feel because my blood has remained good, it is a blessing from God.'']

[H4ckJack]

It depends on your definition of dominate.

If you regard it as the most numerous then this honour probably goes to the phytoplankton in the oceans.

Greatest impact on the planet? The phytoplankton wins again. Without them there would be insufficient oxygen generation for other life forms to exist.

Once again you are stating 'facts' based only on your limited and incomplete worldview.

Oh so phytoplankton has the power to stop man (who can decide by himself) from destroying every phytoplankton that exists on Earth?

Do dolphins (who you claim could be way smarter than us) have the same impact on the planet as the phytoplankton or are they as numerous?

I can see animals that singularly are better than man at something, but I can't see another animal that is better in all things man can do (or plants for that matter).

[H4ckJack]

Our thumbs are longer and not used for climbing trees quite as often. And remember, we did, after all, evolve from a common ancestor with monkeys. Plus, I did not specifically mention monkeys. Might as well compare our brains with ant brains. There are many animals more intelligent than monkeys.

Ants do always the same cycle every year without ever learning something that would improve... anything. Way to beat humans in wits! :icon_lol:

[Sister Faith]

Oh so phytoplankton has the power to stop man (who can decide by himself) from destroying every phytoplankton that exists on Earth?

Do dolphins (who you claim could be way smarter than us) have the same impact on the planet as the phytoplankton or are they as numerous?

I can see animals that singularly are better than man at something, but I can't see another animal that is better in all things man can do (or plants for that matter).

Every animal & every plant on this planet is smarter than humans by the simple fact that we are the only ones stupid enough to foul our own nest (Earth).

[fosley]

On the contrary: if we would have a better brain, better lungs, better ANYTHING we'd transform energy faster (consuming Earth faster).If our eyes weren't wired all funny, we'd use less energy, not more, because right now we're wasting energy processing the signal to filter out the wires. Similarly for things like the apendix; right now we waste energy both creating and sustaining it for no reason.

I'm not 100% sure, but I think we would also see better just by removing the filtering, because that's several thousand rods and cones that are no longer staring at nothing for our entire lives. We already waste energy maintaining them, so moving the wires to the back would let that energy do something useful. Alternately, we could remove all the un-used rods and cones to save even more energy while maintaining the same level of vision (though you'd probably want to spread the remaining rods and cones evenly to get the best picture).

My point was that humans are better than other creatures (proven by the fact that humans dominate the planet)What part of "we're on the fast track to destroying ourselves while hundreds of thousands of other species have been contently living for tens of millions of years without problem" constitutes "humans dominate the planet"? Just because we have briefly emerged at what we perceive to be "the top" doesn't make us the "winners" of evolution.

[GeoffBoulton]

Oh so phytoplankton has the power to stop man (who can decide by himself) from destroying every phytoplankton that exists on Earth?

Do dolphins (who you claim could be way smarter than us) have the same impact on the planet as the phytoplankton or are they as numerous?

I can see animals that singularly are better than man at something, but I can't see another animal that is better in all things man can do (or plants for that matter).

If man destroyed the phytoplankton he would also be signing his own death warrant. That puts them in a very dominant position whether it was their intention or not.

I don't claim dolphins are way smarter than us I claim that we cannot possibly understand the world they live in or their perceptions of it so are not in a position to judge that we are 'better' than they are. If you can't understand that very simple idea then there really is little point in further discussion.

[Sister Faith]

If our eyes weren't wired all funny, we'd use less energy, not more, because right now we're wasting energy processing the signal to filter out the wires. Similarly for things like the apendix; right now we waste energy both creating and sustaining it for no reason.

I'm not 100% sure, but I think we would also see better just by removing the filtering, because that's several thousand rods and cones that are no longer staring at nothing for our entire lives. We already waste energy maintaining them, so moving the wires to the back would let that energy do something useful. Alternately, we could remove all the un-used rods and cones to save even more energy while maintaining the same level of vision (though you'd probably want to spread the remaining rods and cones evenly to get the best picture).

What part of "we're on the fast track to destroying ourselves while hundreds of thousands of other species have been contently living for tens of millions of years without problem" constitutes "humans dominate the planet"? Just because we have briefly emerged at what we perceive to be "the top" doesn't make us the "winners" of evolution.

Just because it doesn't kill us or have any apparent ill effects when our appendixes are removed doesn't mean it is a useless organ we are wasting energy on creating & maintaining. The medical community does not yet understand its exact function.

[sudikics]

See here (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/09/magazine/09_4_appendix.html?_r=1&ref=magazine&oref=slogin). Apparently, someone figured the appendix out: it's a stronghold for good bacteria to replenish our bodies if something goes wrong. I guess it sometimes gets bad abcteria, hence appendicitis.

[H4ckJack]

If man destroyed the phytoplankton he would also be signing his own death warrant. That puts them in a very dominant position whether it was their intention or not.

I don't claim dolphins are way smarter than us I claim that we cannot possibly understand the world they live in or their perceptions of it so are not in a position to judge that we are 'better' than they are. If you can't understand that very simple idea then there really is little point in further discussion.

If you can't understand that man is "God's greatest creation" because no other living creature can be better than man in all things (not better in an INDIVIDUAL field of "work") living creatures can do then there really is little point in further discussion.

[GeoffBoulton]

If you can't understand that man is "God's greatest creation" because no other living creature can be better than man in all things (not better in an INDIVIDUAL field of "work") living creatures can do then there really is little point in further discussion.

Your answer shows that you don't understand the concept so you're right, further discussion is pointless

[fosley]

If you can't understand that man is "God's greatest creation" because no other living creature can be better than man in all things (not better in an INDIVIDUAL field of "work") living creatures can do then there really is little point in further discussion.No animal on this planet excels at everything. That means there can be no "greatest creation" based on your criteria. Since we can only do better than other animals in INDIVIDUAL fields of "work", we can't claim the title either. We are presumably the best at cognitive thinking, abstract creation, etc., but we are definately not the best at running, flying, swimming, breathing underwater, digging through the ground, etc. The only way we could be considered the best is if we define certain attributes as being more important than others, and we are clearly biased in which attributes we consider to be most important.

[huntedbyninjas]

If you can't understand that man is "God's greatest creation" because no other living creature can be better than man in all things (not better in an INDIVIDUAL field of "work") living creatures can do then there really is little point in further discussion.

Mm I disagree. Sure we're great at thinking, but animals are too. They have the brain capacity to be able to think as well as we do, but the reason they dont is becuase what they have WORKS for them. So why change the way you think if there is no need to?

Humans are the only living things that change everything around them numerous times a year because they are unhappy with their surroundings. This judge mentality is what causes the world to be as bad as it is now.

Also I agree, we couldnt call our selves the best if we ruin the world we were born and raised on.

[GeoffBoulton]

Glad to see that everyone else seems to understand the concept :icon_lol: